Post navigation

The Obama Administration is seeking to increase prices on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, a move that has inevitably stirred up trouble in Congress, causing Congress to introduce new legislation.

In May, the DOE publicized estimates of how much a ton of carbon dioxide emissions costs the US — the estimate in 2010 dollars was $21, a decrease from the 2007 estimate, which was $36 per ton.

Carbon dioxide emissions fell out of demand, and prices plummeted, between those years because the administration did not lawfully require companies to buy CO2 stock. But Obama has found that those estimates are significant because the pricier carbon pollution becomes, the greater impact it can have on both the US environment and economy. The EPA is planning to introduce additional, similar regulations, which also include limits for new power plants.

This August, House Republicans passed a bill, prohibiting the use of those estimates; House Republicans would rather have Congress price out estimates, rather than the administration.

Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz has concluded that the 2007 $36 estimate is similar, or lower, than estimates used by major oil companies. Exxon Mobil Corp, for instance, has priced carbon dioxide emissions at $80 per ton by 2040, while BP currently prices carbon at $40 per ton.

The great assumption behind placing a price tag on carbon emissions is that climate change is rapidly developing, and that more CO2 in the atmosphere will give way to more natural disasters and growing sea levels. The Bush Administration was also moving to price carbon emissions, though unsuccessful. The Obama Administration has employed many computer economic models in order to ascertain current estimates, though such estimates are not trusted by all. A $36/ton estimate could surely lead to stricter regulations on coal-fired power plants, meaning higher electricity costs for consumers.

Yale economics professor William Nordhaus is the innovator behind the best-known climate change model. While numerous scientists have tried to deny the fact that climate change exists, Nordhaus, though “no climate hawk”, continues to present key facts as to why it is important that CO2 emissions be regulated. Read more here.